ECAN Metro Users CHCH Report 2015 D3.pdf

2015 Metro User
Christchurch
Research Report
June 2015
www.researchfirst.co.nz

Contents
1
Research Context and Design
03
2015
1.1 Introduction 03
Metro User
1.2
Research Objectives 03
Christchurch
1.3
Research Design 03
2
Key Messages
04
2.1
Satisfaction is Steady or has Improved  04
2.2
The Effects of the December Route  Changes are Uneven 04
2.3
Minor Changes to the Profile of Users 04
3
Profile of Passengers
05
3.1
A More Detailed View 06
4
Profile of Use
08
4.1
Type of Journey 09
4.2
Frequency of Use 09
4.3
Purpose of Trip 10
4.4
Metro Payment 11
5
Current Bus Routes
12
6
Impact of the December 2014 Route Changes
13
7
Satisfaction with Current Trip
14
7.1
Reasons for Satisfaction with Trip 18
7.2
Reasons for Dissatisfaction with Trip 19
Disclaimer
8
Satisfaction with Public Transport in the Past Three Months
20
Research First notes that the
views presented in the report
8.1
Likelihood of Recommending Public Transport to a Friend / Colleague 23
do not necessarily represent the
views of Environment Canterbury.
8.2
Suggested Improvements to Public Transport Services 24
In addition, the information in
this report is accurate to the
9
Means of Travelling if Public Transport is Unavailable
26
best of the knowledge and belief
of Research First Ltd. While
Research First Ltd has exercised
9.1
Alternative Means of Travel 26
all reasonable skill and care in
the preparation of information
10
Travelling to the Bus/ Ferry Stop
28
in this report, Research First Ltd
accepts no liability in contract,
11
Passengers with Bikes
29
tort, or otherwise for any loss,
damage, injury or expense,
whether direct, indirect, or
consequential, arising out of the
provision of information in this
report.
02   ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURCH
www.researchfirst.co.nz

1 Research Context and Design
1.1 Introduction
1.3
Research Design
Environment Canterbury, the regional council servicing the
As with previous iterations, this research was conducted via
Canterbury region, is the lead agency for the provision of
on-bus and on-ferry intercept surveys with passengers. A
public passenger transport. Environment Canterbury is
total of 2,077 surveys were completed in Christchurch. This
an advocating and influencing agency for the provision of
sample was stratified to ensure a representative spread
public transport infrastructure by territorial authorities
of users was interviewed. This involved interviewing every
and the New Zealand Transport Agency. Environment
nth person where possible. In the case of refusal, the next
Canterbury works hard to provide sustainable and
available person was interviewed (i.e. n+1st person). The
affordable transport alternatives.
sample was also structured to include a representative
sample from each route across targeted times of the day.
Public passenger transport has been identified as an
Quotas were developed based on patronage data by route
effective way of moving large numbers of people (including
and resulted in 1460 surveys completed on Go Bus routes,
the transport-disadvantaged) to employment, education,
594 completed on Red Bus routes, and 23 interviews
recreation and social activities in a way that reduces these
conducted with Black Cat ferry passengers.
effects. Maintaining patronage growth for those purposes
relies on ongoing investment in improvements to services by
A sample of this size (N=2,077) provides Environment
Environment Canterbury and in infrastructure by territorial
Canterbury with results with a margin of error of +/-1.9%1.
local authorities and the New Zealand Transport Agency.
This means that the results provided in the report are
robust and Environment Canterbury can have confidence
The Metro User survey was completed by Research First in
that they provide an accurate view of the perceptions of
both 2013 and 2014. This report presents the results of the
service users in Christchurch.
2015 iteration and provides a comparison with the results
from the previous two years.
It is worth noting that the margins of error associated with
subsets in the sample will be larger than +/-1.9% because
1.2
Research Objectives
maximum sampling error is a function of the total size of
The objectives of the Environment Canterbury Metro User
the sample, irrespective of the size of the population. It is
Research are to understand:
important to keep this in mind and to remember that the
results become less precise as the sample size shrinks.
n  Who is using the system, the demographic
characteristics of the traveller, and whether there is any
change to the profile of travellers over time;
n  What the level of satisfaction is with the network
service provided, measuring frequency, reliability, value
for money, accessibility, comfort, driver attitude and
ease of use;
n  How users view the provision of information
and infrastructure that form part of a bus user’s
experience; and
n  How users view the services provided by different
companies (inter-service provider comparison), and the
system overall.
1. At the 95% confidence interval.
03   ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURCH
www.researchfirst.co.nz

2
Key Messages
An intercept survey with bus and ferry passengers was conducted in
Christchurch in 2015. This repeated similar projects conducted in 2013 and 2014.
The key findings from that research are:
n  Environment Canterbury and the operators do well at satisfying their
customers with regard to public transport overall and their day to day use of
the Metro service;
n  Satisfaction with the service remains steady or has improved since 2013; and
n  The December 2014 route changes affected the travel patterns of one-third of
service users. Among this group, experiences of those changes were uneven
with some identifying positive outcomes and others saying the service is now
less convenient and slower.
2.1
Satisfaction is Steady or has Improved
Passengers across the operators were satisfied with the services being provided
both day to day and when considering the public transport system overall.
84%
Respondents were more satisfied with the aspects directly relating the bus or
ferry journey (i.e. the day to day service) than they were with the elements that
Satisfaction with
comprise the overall Metro service.
this trip.
Satisfaction with both the day to day use of the Metro service and the public
transport system overall has either remained steady or improved since 2013.
Specific areas of improvement since 2013 included how the timetable meets
passengers’ needs, the frequency of the service, real time information quality
71%
and availability, and the bus shelters.
This high level of satisfaction is reflected in the large proportion of respondents
Satisfaction with
(84%) who would be likely to recommend public transport in Christchurch.
the public transport
Overall, Black Cat users continued to be rated higher than their competitors
system overall (past
for the range of factors measured. At the same time, passengers of Red Bus
three months).
services were more satisfied than Go Bus service users.
2.2
The Effects of the December Route
2.3
Minor Changes to the Profile of Users

Changes are Uneven
While the demographic make-up of Metro service users is
The route changes which came into effect in December of
relatively similar in 2015 to that in the previous two years,
2014 changed the travel pattern of 34% of Metro users. Go
there are some minor differences observed. The gender
Bus passengers were the most likely to be affected.
split of metro users was more even in 2015 than in previous
years and reflects the Christchurch population. As in 2013,
While the changes positively impacted some passengers
the most common service users were 18 – 24 year olds. The
(i.e. making the system more convenient, and reducing
age group showing the most growth since 2013 is the 25 to
travel time and transfers), others were less positive. Of
34 group. Use has increased since 2013 in the daytime and
some concern for Environment Canterbury are those who
evening timeframes, but decreased in the Peak AM and PM
noted it is now less convenient to use the metro service
times. Weekday daytimes remain the period of highest use
(14%), and that they are experiencing longer travel times
of the Metro services.
(12%) and more transfers (8%).
04     ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

3
Profile of Passengers
Profile by Gender
Percentage
Male
50%
Female
50%
Profile by Age
Percentage
16 to 17
13%
18 to 24
30%
25 to 34
19%
35 to 44
10%
45 to 59
14%
60 to 64
4%
65+
11%
Profile by Income
Percentage
Under $40,000
59%
$40,000 to $79,999
16%
$80,000 or more
4%
Declined/ Don’t know
21%
Profile by Employment
Percentage
Full time employment
37%
Tertiary student
18%
Part time employment
15%
Retired
11%
Secondary school student
9%
Unemployed (jobseeker or beneficiary)
7%
Homemaker/ domestic
2%
Other
2%
Profile by Driver Licence
Percentage
Yes, have driver licence
54%
No driver licence
46%
Profile by Time of Travel
Percentage
Peak AM (before 9am)
16%
Daytime (9.01am to 3pm)
33%
Peak PM (3 to 6pm)
21%
Evening (after 6pm)
11%
Saturday (all day)
10%
Sunday (all day)
9%
05 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURCH
www.researchfirst.co.nz

3.1
A More Detailed View
3.1.1
Gender of Metro Users
The gender split of metro users was more even in 2015 than in previous years
and closely reflects the make-up of the Greater Christchurch population (51%
female; 49% male)2.
This even gender split applied to metro use at different times of the day and in
the weekends. There were some variations when looking at the age groups of
passengers with more male than female passengers in the 25 to 34 age group
and the opposite in the over 65 age group.
3.1 Gender of Users over Time 2013
2014
2015
Male
47%
46%
50%
Female
53%
54%
50%
3.1.2
Age of Metro Users
3.2 Use of Metro Services, Age Change over Time
2013
2014
2015
Those aged 18 to 24 remain the most
16 to 17
18%
14%
13%
common users of the Christchurch
Metro services in 2015. This group also
18 to 24
29%
26%
30%
represent the highest usage per time
25 to 34
16%
17%
19%
of day. Use of the Metro services has
35 to 44
10%
12%
10%
declined among those aged 16 to 17
since 2013 but has otherwise remained
45 to 59
13%
13%
14%
relatively consistent.
60 to 64
3%
4%
4%
65+
10%
14%
11%
3.1.3
Time of Travel
3.3 Use of Metro Services, Time of Travel Change Over Time
2013
2014
2015
While weekend passenger numbers
Peak AM
23%
18%
16%
have remained relatively consistent
since 2013, there has been some
Daytime
27%
31%
33%
change in use when considering the
Peak PM
25%
24%
21%
time travelling on weekdays. Table
Evening
6%
9%
11%
3.3 shows that use has increased
since 2013 in the daytime and
Saturday
10%
10%
10%
evening timeframes, but decreased
Sunday
9%
7%
9%
in the Peak AM and PM times.
Daytime (9:01am to 3pm) on the
weekdays remains the period of
3.4 Use of Metro Services, Gender by Time of Travel
highest use of the Metro services.

Peak AM Daytime Peak PM Evening Saturday Sunday
Male
48%
50%
53%
53%
48%
49%
Female
52%
50%
47%
47%
52%
51%
2. http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/data-tables/total-by-topic.aspx
06 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

When considering the time of travel by age group, Table 3.6 shows that 18 to 24
year olds make up the biggest group of passengers in each time period. Those
over 65 were more likely to use the service in the daytime (weekdays) and in
the weekends.
3.5 Use of Metro Services, Gender by Age

16 to 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44 45 to 64
65+
Male
51%
53%
55%
49%
47%
40%
Female
49%
47%
45%
51%
53%
60%
Total Respondents
265
627
389
211
366
219
3.6 Use of Metro Services, Age by Time of Travel

Peak AM Daytime Peak PM Evening Saturday Sunday
16 to 17
17%
10%
15%
9%
13%
16%
18 to 24
28%
30%
29%
33%
28%
34%
25 to 34
19%
14%
22%
26%
19%
19%
35 to 44
11%
10%
10%
13%
8%
9%
45 to 64
20%
18%
19%
16%
18%
11%
65+
4%
18%
6%
4%
13%
12%
3.1.4
Licenced Passengers
Slightly more than half of Metro service users have driver licences. This suggests
the service is valuable to drivers as well as non-drivers. These results are
consistent with those in 2014.
3.7 Use of Metro Services, Licenced Drivers Over Time
2014
2015
Yes, have driver licence
54%
54%
No driver licence
46%
46%
3.1.5
Income of Passengers
The Metro service is used by Christchurch residents with a range of incomes.
However, use is significantly higher among those with lower incomes (i.e. under
$40,000 per annum).
07 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

4Profile of Use
Type of Journey
Percentage
Return trip
70%
One way
30%
Frequency of Use
Percentage
Daily
52%
Several times a week
27%
Weekly
9%
Fortnightly
4%
Monthly
3%
Every six months
1%
Yearly
1%
Less frequently than yearly
4%
Purpose of Trip
Percentage
Work/ work related
35%
Social/ recreational
23%
Shopping/ personal business/ medical
23%
Education
18%
Tourist/ Travel
1%
Payment Method
Percentage
Metrocard
69%
Cash
21%
SuperGold Card
10%
08 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURCH
www.researchfirst.co.nz

4.1
Type of Journey
Most (70%) of the users were using the Metro service for a round trip (i.e. they
were, or would later be, returning to the same place). Peak AM and daytime
travellers, as well as older passengers were the most likely to be using the
service for a round trip. Evening travellers and those aged 18-24 were the most
likely to travel one-way using the service.
4.1 Type of Journey by Time of Travel

Peak AM Daytime Peak PM Evening Saturday Sunday
Return Trip
76%
73%
67%
62%
68%
69%
One Way
24%
27%
33%
38%
32%
31%
4.2 Type of Journey by Age of Passenger

16 to 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44 45 to 64
65+
Return Trip
71%
63%
70%
70%
75%
82%
One Way
29%
37%
30%
30%
25%
18%
4.2
Frequency of Use
4.3 Frequency of Use by Time of Travel

Peak AM Daytime Peak PM Evening Saturday Sunday
Those who use the Metro service
tend to use it frequently. Half of those
Daily
70%
43%
59%
61%
35%
40%
using the Metro service use it on a
Several times a week
20%
30%
25%
22%
31%
31%
daily basis, while a further quarter
Weekly
4%
10%
7%
7%
16%
14%
use the service several times a week.
Peak AM users and those aged 16 to 17
Fortnightly
3%
5%
2%
4%
4%
6%
were the most likely to use the Metro
Monthly
2%
4%
2%
2%
7%
2%
service daily while weekend users
Every six months
1%
1%
1%
1%
0%
1%
and those aged 65 or over were more
Yearly
0%
1%
0%
1%
0%
1%
casual users of the service.
Less frequently than
1%
5%
3%
3%
6%
6%
yearly
4.4 Frequency of Use by Age of Passenger

16 to 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44 45 to 64
65+
Daily
71%
53%
54%
51%
48%
27%
Several times a week
17%
27%
24%
26%
27%
42%
Weekly
8%
9%
7%
9%
9%
14%
Fortnightly
2%
4%
5%
4%
5%
6%
Monthly
3%
2%
2%
4%
6%
4%
Every six months
0%
1%
1%
2%
1%
4%
Yearly
0%
0%
1%
0%
1%
1%
Less frequently than
0%
5%
7%
4%
4%
2%
yearly
09 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

4.3
Purpose of Trip
As in 2014, the main reason for using
4.5 Purpose of Trip
the Metro service was for work
2014
2015
purposes. This was followed by
Work/ work related
32%
35%
social or shopping/ personal reasons.
As expected, around half of those
Social/ recreational
25%
23%
travelling in the peak periods were
Shopping/ personal business/ medical
29%
23%
travelling for work related reasons, and
Education
13%
18%
significant numbers were travelling
to school or other education. The
Tourist/ Travel
1%
1%
main reasons given for weekday and
Returning home
1%
0%
weekend travel was for social reasons,
shopping and personal business.
4.6 Purpose of Trip by Time of Travel

Peak AM Daytime Peak PM Evening Saturday Sunday
Among those aged 25 to 64, travelling
for work purposes was the most
Work/ work related
55%
25%
46%
48%
15%
17%
dominant reason for using the Metro
Social/ recreational
7%
21%
16%
24%
47%
47%
service. Young passengers (i.e. aged 16
Shopping/ personal
9%
31%
19%
15%
31%
29%
to 24) were often travelling to or from
business/ medical
school or other education providers.
Education
28%
22%
19%
12%
5%
4%
Passengers aged over 65 were
Tourist/ Travel
1%
1%
0%
0%
2%
2%
predominantly travelling for social
reasons and personal business.
Returning home
0%
0%
0%
1%
0%
1%
4.7 Purpose of Trip by Age of Passenger

16 to 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44 45 to 64
65+
Work/ work related
9%
33%
52%
50%
46%
7%
Social/ recreational
26%
22%
20%
19%
20%
35%
Shopping/ personal
14%
14%
17%
22%
30%
57%
business/ medical
Education
49%
30%
8%
6%
2%
1%
Tourist/ Travel
0%
1%
1%
2%
1%
0%
Returning home
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
10 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

4.4 Metro Payment
Metro users were asked to identify how they paid for their trip. In 2015, 69% paid
by Metrocard. This result strikes a balance between the 2013 and 2014 results
suggesting there has been little change across this period. Similar numbers used
cash and the Supergold card3 as in previous years.
As expected, most passengers aged over 65 were Supergold card holders. Most
of their travel occurred during the daytime or in the weekends, the times of day
at which free travel is provided. Metrocard use was most common in the morning
peak, afternoon peak and evening times.
4.8 Method of Payment for Travel, Change Over Time

2013
2014
2015
Metro Card
72%
67%
69%
Cash
19%
21%
21%
SuperGold Card
9%
12%
10%
4.9 Method of Payment, by Time of Travel
Peak AM Daytime Peak PM Evening Saturday Sunday
Metrocard
82%
60%
75%
74%
58%
68%
Cash
14%
22%
20%
24%
28%
20%
SuperGold Card
4%
18%
4%
3%
14%
12%
Other
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
4.10Method of Payment by Age of Passenger

16 to 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44 45 to 64
65+
Metrocard
75%
74%
76%
77%
78%
7%
Cash
24%
25%
23%
22%
20%
1%
SuperGold Card
0%
0%
0%
0%
2%
91%
Other
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
3. The Supergold card system provides free travel for seniors at certain times of day.
11 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

5
Current Bus Routes
Table 5.1 provides details of the number of Metro service users interviewed by
route and provider.
Number of
Percentage of
5.1 Routes Travelled
Respondents
Respondents
Black Cat Ferry
23
1%
Red Bus
594
29%
17
39
2%
28
128
6%
29
40
2%
100
71
3%
107
10
0%
108
7
0%
120
37
2%
135
6
0%
145
14
1%
535
7
0%
Purple
235
11%
Go Bus
1460
70%
44
20
1%
60
112
5%
80
150
7%
95
2
0%
125
66
3%
130
66
3%
140
71
3%
150
1
0%
820
4
0%
951
1
0%
952
1
0%
Blue
229
11%
Orange
133
6%
Orbitor - Anti-clockwise
135
6%
Orbitor - Clockwise
157
8%
Yellow
312
15%
Total
2077
100%
12 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

6
Impact of the December 2014 Route Changes
Respondents were asked whether their travel patterns
experiences with the changes with some indicating they
had changed since the changes were made to the routes in
made travel easier while others were less positive. Of some
December last year. Those affected by the route changes
concern are those who noted it is now less convenient to
were then asked how their travel has changed.
use the metro service (14%), and that they are experiencing
longer travel times (12%) and more transfers (8%). Although
One-third of passengers noted their travel had changed due
it’s also worth noting that satisfaction with the frequency of
to the December route changes. Passengers had uneven
services has increased since 2013 (see Section 7).
6.1 Change of Travel Patterns since Changes
Percentage
Travel has changed
34%
Travel has not changed
66%
6.2 Change of Travel Patterns since Changes by Operator

Red Bus
Go Bus
Black Cat
Travel has changed
23%
39%
26%
The December
Travel has not changed
77%
61%
74%
route changes
affected one-third
6.3 Change of Travel Patterns since Changes by Time of Travel
of passengers.
Peak AM Daytime Peak PM Evening Saturday Sunday
Travel has changed
37%
35%
59%
31%
27%
38%
14% now find it
Travel has not
63%
65%
114%
69%
73%
62%
less convenient to
changed
use buses.
6.2 Change of Travel Patterns since Changes by Operator

N
%
Travel has not changed
1365
66%
Travel has changed
710
34%
Take different routes/ buses
377
18%
It’s less convenient now to use buses
281
14%
Longer travel time
242
12%
Bus stops have changed locations
207
10%
More transfers between bus routes
167
8%
It’s more convenient now to use buses
96
5%
Routes have changed
52
3%
Shorter travel time
37
2%
Buses less frequent/ Times not convenient
34
2%
Fewer transfers between bus routes
28
1%
Other
36
2%
Total
2075
13 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURCH
www.researchfirst.co.nz

7
Satisfaction with Current Trip
Respondents were asked to indicate their level of satisfaction with features
of the bus or ferry trip they were interviewed on (Table 7.1). A ten point scale
was used where 0 = extremely dissatisfied and 10 = extremely satisfied. Mean
84%
scores were used to compare data year on year. The mean score represents the
average rating on a 0 – 10 scale. A ‘more than satisfied’ (MTS) score has also been
calculated to help with the interpretation of these results. This simply combines
Satisfied with
the percentage of respondents who rated each statement an 8, 9 or 10.
their current trip.
Metro users scored most measures as eight or higher when rating their current
trip, indicating that they were generally satisfied. This is also reflected by the
MTS score which shows that 84% of passengers were satisfied with their
current trip.
Table 7.1 shows that the 2015 results represent an improvement from
performance in 2014 but are more in-line with the scores achieved in 2013. This
suggests that the actual result may be one of consistent performance over this
time with very little movement. However, satisfaction with how the timetable
meets needs and the frequency of the service has increased since 2013. This is
good news considering the changes made in December 2014.
Overall, passengers of Red Bus services were significantly more satisfied with
their current trip than passengers of Go Bus services. This is reflected in the
scores for the various aspects measured where Red Bus passengers rated
their satisfaction higher than Go Bus passengers across all factors. Black Cat
passengers were more satisfied with most aspects of their current trip than both
Go Bus and Red Bus users, however given the small sample (N=23) of Black Cat
passengers these results should be treated with caution.
There were few significant differences in satisfaction in terms of time of travel
indicating that satisfaction is not generally adversely affected by busy peak
time traffic periods. However, what does stand out is that those travelling at
peak periods were less satisfied with the number of seats available than those
travelling at other times.
As in 2013 and 2014, those aged over 65 tend to be more satisfied with their
current trip than younger passengers. Where this theme varies is in satisfaction
with getting on and off the bus/ferry. The older age groups were the least
satisfied with this aspect of the service. Notably school aged children were less
satisfied with most aspects of their current trip than older passengers.
14 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

2013
2014
2015
7.1 Satisfaction with Current Trip,
Change Over Time
Mean
scores
MTS scores
Mean
scores
MTS scores
Mean
scores
MTS scores
Overall satisfaction with this trip
8.7
86%
8.4
77%
8.7
84%
Personal security during this trip
8.9
89%
8.6
81%
9.0
89%
Ease of getting on and off the bus/ ferry
8.9
86%
8.5
78%
8.9
86%
The driving behaviour of the bus/ ferry driver
8.6
82%
8.4
76%
8.5
78%
Having enough seats available
8.6
80%
8.3
72%
8.5
75%
The helpfulness and attitude of the driver/ ferry staff
8.5
79%
8.3
75%
8.4
75%
Comfort of the inside temperature
8.3
74%
8.1
70%
8.3
74%
The cleanliness of the vehicle
8.0
68%
8.1
70%
8.3
73%
The bus/ ferry being on time (keeping to the timetable)
8.0
68%
7.7
62%
8.0
67%
How the timetable meets your needs
7.5
60%
7.8
65%
7.9
66%
The value for money of the fare
8.0
67%
7.8
63%
7.9
65%
How often services run
7.5
58%
7.7
60%
7.8
65%
7.2 Satisfaction with Current Trip, Red Bus, Change Over Time
2013
2014
2015
Overall satisfaction with this trip
8.7
8.6
8.8
Personal security during this trip
9.1
8.9
9.2
Ease of getting on and off the bus/ferry
9.1
8.7
9.1
The driving behaviour on the bus/ferry driver
8.8
8.7
8.9
Having enough seats available
9.0
8.6
8.9
The helpfulness and attitude of the driver/ferry staff
8.7
8.6
8.7
Comfort of the inside temperature
8.4
8.5
8.5
The cleanliness of the vehicle
8.2
8.5
8.6
'The bus/ferry being on time (keeping to the timetable
8.4
8.1
8.2
How the timetable meets your needs
7.4
8.0
8.0
The value for money of the fare
8.0
8.1
8.1
How often the service runs
7.4
8.0
8.0
7.3 Satisfaction with Current Trip, Go Bus, Change Over Time
2013
2014
2015
Overall satisfaction with this trip
8.7
8.3
8.6
Personal security during this trip
8.9
8.5
9.0
Ease of getting on and off the bus/ferry
8.9
8.5
8.8
The driving behaviour on the bus/ferry driver
8.6
8.3
8.4
Having enough seats available
8.4
8.2
8.3
The helpfulness and attitude of the driver/ferry staff
8.5
8.2
8.3
Comfort of the inside temperature
8.3
8
8.2
The cleanliness of the vehicle
8.1
7.9
8.1
'The bus/ferry being on time (keeping to the timetable
7.8
7.6
7.9
How the timetable meets your needs
7.6
7.8
7.9
The value for money of the fare
8.1
7.7
7.8
How often the service runs
7.5
7.6
7.8
15 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURCH
www.researchfirst.co.nz

7.4 Satisfaction with Current Trip, Black Cat Ferry, Change Over Time
2013
2014
2015
Overall satisfaction with this trip
9.5
9.6
8.9
Personal security during this trip
9.8
9.7
9.5
Ease of getting on and off the bus/ferry
9.0
9.3
8.9
The driving behaviour on the bus/ferry driver
9.7
9.7
9.5
Having enough seats available
9.2
9.6
9.4
The helpfulness and attitude of the driver/ferry staff
9.7
9.8
9.5
Comfort of the inside temperature
9.1
9.2
8.7
The cleanliness of the vehicle
9.4
9.5
9.2
'The bus/ferry being on time (keeping to the timetable
9.6
9.7
9.1
How the timetable meets your needs
8.4
8.5
8.4
The value for money of the fare
8.4
9.0
7.5
How often the service runs
8.5
8.5
8.3
7.5 Satisfaction with Current Trip, by ProviderRed Bus Go Bus Black Cat
Overall satisfaction with this trip
8.8
8.6
8.9
Personal security during this trip
9.2
9.0
9.5
Ease of getting on and off the bus/ferry
9.1
8.8
8.9
The driving behaviour on the bus/ferry driver
8.9
8.4
9.5
Having enough seats available
8.9
8.3
9.4
The helpfulness and attitude of the driver/ferry staff
8.7
8.3
9.5
Comfort of the inside temperature
8.5
8.2
8.7
The cleanliness of the vehicle
8.6
8.1
9.2
'The bus/ferry being on time (keeping to the timetable
8.2
7.9
9.1
How the timetable meets your needs
8.0
7.9
8.4
The value for money of the fare
8.1
7.8
7.5
How often the service runs
8.0
7.8
8.3
7.6 Satisfaction with Current Trip, by Time of Day
Peak AM
Daytime
Peak PM
Evening
Saturday
Sunday
Overall satisfaction with this trip
8.5
8.8
8.5
8.6
8.9
8.8
Personal security during this trip
9.0
9.0
8.9
9.1
9.2
9.2
Ease of getting on and off the bus/ ferry
8.8
8.9
8.8
9.2
9.2
8.9
The driving behaviour of the bus/ ferry driver
8.3
8.5
8.3
8.7
8.9
8.7
Having enough seats available
8.1
8.5
8.1
8.7
9.0
8.9
The helpfulness and attitude of the driver/ ferry staff
8.2
8.5
8.1
8.7
8.9
8.6
Comfort of the inside temperature
8.2
8.4
8.1
8.4
8.5
8.6
The cleanliness of the vehicle/boat
8.3
8.3
8.1
8.4
8.4
8.2
The bus/ferry being on time (keeping to the timetable)
7.8
8.0
7.9
8.0
8.4
8.3
How the timetable meets your needs
7.8
7.9
7.8
7.9
8.2
7.8
The value for money of the fare
7.8
8.0
7.8
7.7
8.1
8.1
How often services run
7.7
7.8
7.7
7.8
8.2
7.9
16 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURCH
www.researchfirst.co.nz

7.7 Satisfaction with Current Trip, by Age

16 to 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 64
65+
Overall satisfaction with this trip
8.5
8.6
8.7
8.6
8.7
9.1
Personal security during this trip
8.7
9.0
9.1
9.0
9.0
9.3
Ease of getting on and off the bus/ ferry
8.8
9.1
9.0
9.1
8.8
8.5
The driving behaviour of the bus/ ferry driver
8.2
8.5
8.5
8.6
8.4
8.9
Having enough seats available
7.7
8.4
8.6
8.5
8.6
9.1
The helpfulness and attitude of the driver/ ferry staff
8.0
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.4
8.9
Comfort of the inside temperature
8.1
8.3
8.4
8.3
8.3
8.5
The cleanliness of the vehicle/boat
7.8
8.2
8.4
8.4
8.3
8.7
The bus/ferry being on time (keeping to the timetable)
7.5
7.9
8.2
8.2
8.0
8.6
How the timetable meets your needs
7.6
7.8
7.9
7.9
7.9
8.7
The value for money of the fare
7.8
7.4
7.7
8.0
8.4
9.4
How often services run
7.5
7.7
7.8
7.9
7.7
8.6
17 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

7.1
Reasons for Satisfaction with Trip
Respondents who rated their overall satisfaction with this trip 6 – 10 were asked
reasons for their satisfaction. Satisfied metro users identified a wide range of
factors that contributed to their rating of the service (Table 7.8). General good
service and the service meeting their needs were the most commonly identified
reasons for satisfaction. There were relatively few differences in the responses
between Go Bus and Red Bus passengers. Black Cat passengers noted the
service was convenient.
7.8 Reason for Satisfaction, by Provider

Red Bus
Go Bus
Black Cat
Total
Positive Comments
Good service
26%
26%
27%
26%
No issues with service/ Meets my needs
24%
22%
9%
23%
Timing/ Frequency
8%
8%
5%
8%
Friendly/ helpful driver
8%
6%
0%
7%
Convenience
5%
6%
14%
6%
On time
5%
4%
0%
4%
Reliable
3%
3%
0%
3%
Comfort/ Warmth
3%
3%
0%
3%
Good prices
2%
3%
0%
2%
Good/ safe driver
2%
2%
0%
2%
Good seating/ plentiful seating/ spacious
1%
2%
0%
2%
Bus ride is relaxing/ enjoyable
1%
2%
0%
2%
Well maintained bus/Clean
1%
2%
0%
1%
Only way I have to travel
2%
1%
0%
1%
Safety
1%
1%
0%
1%
Don't have to drive
2%
1%
5%
1%
Other
6%
4%
5%
5%
Negative Comments
Satisfied but...Drivers can be poor (Quality of driving/ attitude)
1%
3%
0%
3%
Satisfied but...Timing/ Delays/ Not reliable
2%
3%
14%
3%
Satisfied but...Sometimes overcrowded/ need more seats
1%
2%
0%
2%
Satisfied but...Could be cheaper
2%
1%
18%
2%
Satisfied but...Can improve
1%
2%
0%
2%
Satisfied but...Frequency/ Fewer buses available
1%
1%
5%
2%
Satisfied but...Inside temperature not appropriate
1%
1%
9%
1%
Other
2%
3%
0%
3%
Other (Neither positive nor negative)
2%
1%
0%
1%
Don't know
12%
12%
14%
12%
Sample (Overall satisfaction rated 6 - 10)
572
1402
22
1996
18 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

7.2
Reasons for Dissatisfaction with Trip
Metro users who rated their overall satisfaction with their trip in the
‘dissatisfied’ range (0 – 5) were asked to identify the reasons for their
dissatisfaction4. Areas of dissatisfaction included not keeping to the scheduling,
being too slow, poor driving and the expense of the service.
7.9 Reason for Dissatisfaction, by Provider (Numbers)

Red Bus
Go Bus
Negative Reasons
Keeping to schedule
6
9
Too slow
1
6
Need to improve drivers
4
2
Expensive
1
3
Frequency
1
3
Crowded
3
2
Uncomfortable
3
2
Improve connections
0
5
Need to improve timetable/ schedule
1
3
Cleanliness
0
3
Need to improve service
2
1
Poor driving
1
1
Do not feel safe
1
1
Inconvenient to use
0
2
Unreliable/ Variable
0
1
Lack of maintenance
0
1
General dislike of using buses
0
1
Web/ Real time information not working
0
1
Positive Reasons
Dissatisfied, but...Good service
0
1
Dissatisfied, but...Buses are clean/ comfortable
0
1
Don't know
2
17
Sample (Overall satisfaction rated 0-5)
19
54
4. Note: Numbers of respondents (N) have been reported here rather than percentages due to the small
sample sizes. Black Cat has been excluded as there was only one Black Cat passenger who rated their
satisfaction in the ‘dissatisfied’ range.
19 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

8
Satisfaction with Public Transport
in the Past Three Months
Respondents were asked to indicate their level of satisfaction with their experience of
public transport in the region over the last three months. As with satisfaction with the
71%
current trip, an eleven point scale was used where 0 = extremely dissatisfied and 10 =
extremely satisfied. Mean scores have been used to compare data year on year. The mean
Satisfied with
scores represent the average rating on a 0 – 10 scale. A ‘more than satisfied’ (MTS) score
has also been calculated to help with the interpretation of these results. This simply
the public
combines the percentage of respondents who rated each statement an 8, 9 or 10.
transport
system over
Metro users were generally satisfied with their experience with public transport over the
past three months scoring most measures as eight or higher. Overall, Metro users rated
the past three
their satisfaction with public transport as 8.1 (or 71% MTS). This is lower than the overall
months
score for the current trip suggesting that satisfaction with some aspects of the overall
experience of using the Metro service is lower than their satisfaction with aspects directly
related to the bus (or ferry) journey.
Those areas rated highest included the convenience of
Bus passengers with the public transport system overall,
paying for public transport and the ease of obtaining
and the travel time and convenience of paying specifically.
information regarding routes and timetables. Areas of
Scores per operator have either remained consistent or
neutral satisfaction (rated between seven and eight) included
improved since 2013.
the quality and availability of bus shelters and information
about service delays. The good news for Environment
Overall, the time of day travelled had little impact on the
Canterbury and the service operators is that the results for
satisfaction with the public transport system over the past
each aspect have either improved or remain consistent with
three months. This is good news because it means the busy
those achieved in the previous two years. This suggests an
peak time periods are not adversely affecting satisfaction
overall improvement in performance since 2013.
levels (Table 8.6).
As with satisfaction with their current trip, Metro users
In terms of the three main transport providers, satisfaction
aged 65+, were significantly more satisfied with most
was highest for the services offered by Black Cat5 and
aspects of the public transport service than younger users
lowest for Go Bus. This is consistent with the results for
(Table 8.7). This is easiest to see when looking at the scores
the current trip suggesting that Black Cat provides a better
for the public transport system overall. Those aged over 65
service overall and that Red Bus outperforms Go Bus. Red
provided an overall score of 8.7, while younger age groups
Bus passengers were significantly more satisfied that Go
provided scores of between 7.9 and 8.1.
2013
2014
2015
8.1 Satisfaction with the Public Transport System
(Last three months); Change over Time
Mean
MTS
Mean
MTS
Mean
MTS
scores
scores
scores
scores
scores
scores
The public transport system overall
7.9
65%
8.0
67%
8.1
71%
How convenient is it to pay for public transport
8.6
82%
8.2
73%
8.6
79%
The ease of getting information about public transport routes and timetables
8.1
71%
7.9
67%
8.5
78%
Information via a cellphone or tablet (excluding Apps)
8.0
70%
8.0
69%
8.3
74%
Real time information quality
7.5
59%
7.8
63%
8.1
68%
The travel time (considering the distance you travel)
7.9
67%
8.0
68%
8.0
68%
Real time information availability
7.4
56%
7.7
62%
8.0
66%
Quality of bus shelters
6.6
40%
7.0
46%
7.4
56%
Information about service delays/ disruptions (if applicable)
6.9
46%
7.1
48%
7.2
52%
Availability of bus shelters
6.5
37%
7.0
46%
7.2
49%
5. These results should be read with caution given the small sample size for Black Cat (N=23).
20 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURCH
www.researchfirst.co.nz

8.2 Satisfaction with the Public Transport System, Red Bus;
Change over Time
2013
2014
2015
Red Bus
The public transport system overall
7.9
8.2
8.2
How convenient is it to pay for public transport
8.7
8.5
8.9
The ease of getting information about public transport routes and timetables
8.3
8.3
8.6
Information via a cellphone or tablet (excluding Apps)
8.1
8.0
8.4
Real time information quality
7.5
7.9
8.1
The travel time (considering the distance you travel)
8.0
8.5
8.4
Real time information availability
7.3
7.9
8.0
Quality of bus shelters
6.7
6.9
7.5
Information about service delays/ disruptions (if applicable)
6.9
7.4
7.3
Availability of bus shelters
6.6
6.9
7.1
8.3 Satisfaction with the Public Transport System, Go Bus;
Change over Time
2013
2014
2015
Go Bus
The public transport system overall
8.0
7.9
8.0
How convenient is it to pay for public transport
8.6
8.1
8.5
The ease of getting information about public transport routes and timetables
8.1
7.8
8.5
Information via a cellphone or tablet (excluding Apps)
7.9
8.0
8.2
Real time information quality
7.6
7.7
8.1
The travel time (considering the distance you travel)
7.9
7.8
7.9
Real time information availability
7.5
7.7
7.9
Quality of bus shelters
6.8
7.0
7.4
Information about service delays/ disruptions (if applicable)
7.1
7.0
7.1
Availability of bus shelters
6.6
7.0
7.1
8.4 Satisfaction with the Public Transport System, Black Cat;
Change over Time
2013
2014
2015
Black Cat
The public transport system overall
8.6
8.8
9.2
How convenient is it to pay for public transport
9.3
9.3
9.3
The ease of getting information about public transport routes and timetables
8.9
9.1
9.5
Information via a cell phone or tablet (excluding Apps)
7.9
8.3
9.4
Real time information quality
7.9
7.0
9.1
The travel time (considering the distance you travel)
9.3
8.8
9.5
Real time information availability
7.7
7.3
9.1
Quality of bus shelters
7.4
6.8
9.0
Information about service delays/ disruptions (if applicable)
7.6
6.8
8.6
Availability of bus shelters
8.0
7.4
8.6
21 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

8.5 Satisfaction with Public Transport System (Last
Three Months), by Provider; Summary Table
Red Bus
Go Bus
Black Cat
The public transport system overall
8.2
8.0
9.2
How convenient is it to pay for public transport
8.9
8.5
9.3
The ease of getting information about public transport routes and timetables
8.6
8.5
9.5
Information via a cellphone or tablet (excluding Apps)
8.4
8.2
9.4
Real time information quality
8.1
8.1
9.1
The travel time (considering the distance you travel)
8.4
7.9
9.5
Real time information availability
8.0
7.9
9.1
Quality of bus shelters
7.5
7.4
9.0
Information about service delays/ disruptions (if applicable)
7.3
7.1
8.6
Availability of bus shelters
7.1
7.1
8.6
8.6 Satisfaction with Public Transport System
(Last Three Months), by Time of Day
Peak AM
Daytime
Peak PM
Evening
Saturday
Sunday
The public transport system overall
8.0
8.1
8.0
8.1
8.4
8.3
How convenient is it to pay for public transport
8.5
8.8
8.5
8.4
8.8
8.6
The ease of getting information about public transport routes and
8.5
8.5
8.4
8.6
8.8
8.6
timetables
Information via a cell phone or tablet (excluding Apps)
8.3
8.5
8.1
8.2
8.2
8.1
Real time information quality
8.0
8.2
8.0
8.3
8.1
7.9
The travel time (considering the distance you travel)
7.9
8.1
7.8
8.0
8.3
8.2
Real time information availability
7.9
8.0
7.8
8.3
8.1
7.7
Quality of bus shelters
7.3
7.4
7.4
7.8
7.6
7.4
Information about service delays/ disruptions (if applicable)
7.3
7.0
7.0
7.7
7.4
7.1
Availability of bus shelters
7.2
7.0
7.1
7.5
7.4
7.2
8.7 Satisfaction with Public Transport System
(Last Three Months) by Age
16 to 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 64
65+
The public transport system overall
7.9
8.0
8.1
8.1
8.1
8.7
How convenient is it to pay for public transport
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.7
9.0
9.6
The ease of getting information about public transport routes and
8.3
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.5
9.0
timetables
Information via a cell phone or tablet (excluding Apps)
8.3
8.3
8.2
8.4
8.1
8.6
Real time information quality
7.8
8.1
8.2
7.9
8.1
8.5
The travel time (considering the distance you travel)
7.8
7.9
8.0
7.9
8.2
8.7
Real time information availability
7.6
8.1
8.1
7.9
7.9
8.2
Quality of bus shelters
6.9
7.4
7.6
7.5
7.6
7.6
Information about service delays/ disruptions (if applicable)
6.7
7.3
7.4
7.4
7.0
6.9
Availability of bus shelters
6.9
7.3
7.3
7.2
7.0
6.9
22 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

8.1
Likelihood of Recommending Public Transport to a

Friend / Colleague
Respondents were asked how likely they would be to recommend public transport
to a friend or colleague. This was asked by means of a five point scale, where 5 =
very likely to recommend and 1 = very likely to recommend against. To make these
results easier to interpret, a ‘likely to recommend’ score has been calculated. This
simply combines the percentage of respondents who said they would be ‘likely’ or
‘very likely’ to recommend using public transport in Christchurch.
Most users (84%) would recommend public transport to a friend or colleague.
This result is consistent with the relatively high levels of satisfaction with both
their ‘current’ trip and with the public transport system overall.
The 2015 result of 84% being likely to recommend was consistent with that
achieved in 2013 but slightly down on the 2014 score. However, given the
84%
closeness of the scores, the real story here may be that there has been little (or
no) change since 2013.
Would recommend
Passengers of the Black Cat ferry were more likely to recommend the Metro
public transport
service than Go Bus and Red Bus passengers. Despite Red Bus passengers being
more satisfied with the service than Go Bus passengers this does not necessarily
make these passengers more likely to recommend the service.
When considering the ‘likely to recommend’ scores by the age of the passengers
and the time at which they are travelling some differences are noticeable.
Those travelling in peak times appeared to be slightly less likely to recommend
public transport services, while weekend travellers were slightly more likely
to recommend these services. Older passengers (i.e. those over 45) were more
likely to recommend public transport than younger passengers.
8.8 Likelihood of Recommending Public
Transport, Changes over Time
2013
2014
2015
‘Likely to recommend’ score
84%
87%
84%
Very likely to recommend
48%
44%
49%
Likely to recommend
36%
43%
35%
Neither likely to recommend nor to recommend against
11%
11%
13%
Likely to recommend against
3%
2%
1%
Very likely to recommend against
2%
0%
1%
Red Bus
Go Bus
Black Cat Ferry
8.9 Likelihood of Recommending
Public Transport, by Provider
2013
2014
2015
2013
2014
2015
2013
2014
2015
‘Likely to recommend’ score
83%
88%
85%
86%
86%
84%
100%
90%
100%
Very likely to recommend
47%
48%
54%
48%
42%
47%
81%
80%
57%
Likely to recommend
36%
40%
31%
38%
44%
37%
19%
10%
43%
Neither likely to recommend nor to recommend against
11%
11%
13%
10%
11%
14%
0%
10%
0%
Likely to recommend against
3%
1%
1%
3%
3%
1%
0%
0%
0%
Very likely to recommend against
3%
0%
1%
1%
1%
1%
0%
0%
0%
23 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

8.10Likelihood of Recommending Public
Transport, by Time of Day

Peak AM
Daytime
Peak PM
Evening
Saturday
Sunday
Likely to recommend' score
82%
87%
80%
84%
88%
89%
Very likely to recommend
50%
51%
44%
46%
57%
50%
Likely to recommend
33%
36%
36%
38%
31%
39%
Neither likely to recommend nor to recommend against
15%
11%
18%
14%
10%
9%
Likely to recommend against
2%
1%
2%
0%
1%
2%
Very likely to recommend against
1%
1%
0%
1%
1%
0%
8.11 Likelihood of Recommending Public
Transport, by Age

16 to 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 64
65+
Likely to recommend' score
84%
82%
84%
82%
88%
91%
Very likely to recommend
43%
38%
47%
49%
61%
75%
Likely to recommend
41%
44%
37%
32%
27%
16%
Neither likely to recommend nor to recommend against
15%
15%
13%
16%
10%
8%
Likely to recommend against
1%
2%
2%
1%
1%
0%
Very likely to recommend against
0%
1%
1%
2%
1%
1%
8.2
Suggested Improvements to Public Transport Services
Respondents were asked whether they could suggest any improvements to the
region’s public transport system. The most common theme was improving the
frequency and scheduling of services. Specifically, respondents suggested more
frequent services to reduce overcrowding on buses. Other suggested areas
of improvement included bus/ferry comfort and security (16%), routes (13%),
information availability (8%), bus shelters (7%), costs and payments (6%), and
drivers (6%). Close to one-third (29%) could not suggest any improvements.
24 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

Number of Percentage of
8.12 Improvements to Public Transport Services
Respondents Respondents
Frequency and scheduling
499
24%
More/ More frequent buses/ Improve overcrowding
320
15%
Be on time/ follow timetables
98
5%
Early morning/ Late night/ all night service
81
4%
Bus comfort and security
341
16%
Better heating/ ventilation
69
3%
Improve comfort of buses - more space/ better seating
49
2%
Fix/ update buses
48
2%
More pram space/ bike racks
41
2%
Play music/ better music
38
2%
Cleaner buses
33
2%
Other (prevent other passengers from being disruptive; offer wifi; luggage storage; enforce youth giving up
seats for elderly/ disabled; offer/ allow beverages (coffee, water); provide safety belts; security; more hand
63
3%
rails/ poles; charge points on buses; and improved accessibility for elderly/ disabled)
Routes
261
13%
Improve routes/ connections
131
6%
Revert or stop timetable/ route changes
53
3%
Consider dedicated school buses/ More buses during school peak hours
31
1%
Offer express services to further destinations/ main routes
24
1%
Other (shorter routes/ faster trips; and consider zone updates)
22
1%
Information availability
173
8%
Better signage/ information
64
3%
Improve/ update online services (website/ App)
45
2%
More electronic displays at bus stops
38
2%
Improve electronic timetables - more accurate, more information
20
1%
Other (App compatibility with Android phones; and App to work without internet connection)
6
0.3%
More/ Improved bus shelters
152
7%
Costs and payments
128
6%
Cheaper fares
72
3%
Ability to pay by EFTPOS/ credit card on bus
24
1%
Other (improve Supergold card system; Better Metrocard system (i.e. easier to top up, obtain); student offers;
32
2%
offer free bus service; improve speed of online topups becoming active; and separate lines of cash/card payments)
Improve drivers attitude/ performance
115
6%
Miscellaneous
121
6%
More bus lanes/ Widen bus lanes
26
1%
Other (Improve condition of roads, improve transfer process (less transfers/ longer eligibility for discount);
trams/ trains added to service; size of bus to match route/ peak/ level of use; improve weekend service; more
95
5%
advertising of services; finish central exchange; GPS tracking of buses; and better complaints service.
None/Not applicable
605
29%
25 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

9
Means of Travelling if Public Transport is Unavailable
9.1
Alternative Means of Travel
Respondents were asked to note how they would have made the trip they
were interviewed on if public transport had not been available. One-fifth of
respondents would not have made the trip and this shows the value of the Metro
service to the Christchurch community in offering a means of transport. The
Metro service is of special value to those aged over 65, of whom 37% would not
have made the trip if public transport had not been available.
Among those who would still have made the trip, the most common responses
were that they would have been a passenger in or driven a car. This is generally
consistent across most times of day, ages of respondents and the operators.
Black Cat ferry users would be more likely to drive themselves than be a
passenger if public transport were unavailable.
Number of
Percentage of
9.1 Alternative Means of Travel if Bus
Were Not Available for this Trip
Respondents
Respondents
Passenger in a car/ other vehicle
490
24%
Driven a car/ other vehicle
399
19%
Walk
325
16%
Cycle
274
13%
Taxi/ shuttle
154
7%
Don't know
32
2%
Would not have made trip
395
19%
9.2 Alternative Means of Travel by Time of Travel

Peak AM
Daytime
Peak PM
Evening
Saturday
Sunday
Passenger in a car/ other vehicle
25%
21%
25%
27%
24%
21%
Driven a car/ other vehicle
25%
18%
17%
20%
19%
19%
Walk
13%
18%
15%
16%
13%
15%
Cycle
16%
11%
15%
13%
12%
12%
Taxi/ shuttle
5%
8%
7%
10%
8%
8%
Skate/ Skateboard
0%
0%
0%
0%
1%
1%
Don't know
2%
1%
2%
2%
1%
1%
Would not have made trip
14%
22%
18%
12%
22%
22%
26 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

9.3 Alternative Means of Travel by Age

16 to 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 64
65+
Passenger in a car/ other vehicle
44%
28%
19%
16%
16%
14%
Driven a car/ other vehicle
6%
16%
18%
25%
27%
26%
Walk
14%
16%
19%
17%
15%
10%
Cycle
14%
16%
15%
18%
10%
2%
Taxi/ shuttle
0%
7%
10%
11%
8%
8%
Skate/ Skateboard
0%
1%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Don't know
0%
1%
2%
1%
2%
2%
Would not have made trip
21%
13%
17%
12%
23%
37%
9.4 Alternative Means of Travel by Operator

Red Bus
Go Bus
Black Cat
Total
Passenger in a car/ other vehicle
22%
24%
17%
24%
Driven a car/ other vehicle
18%
19%
52%
19%
Walk
18%
15%
0%
16%
Cycle
13%
13%
0%
13%
Taxi/ shuttle
11%
6%
0%
7%
Don't know
2%
1%
9%
2%
Would not have made trip
15%
21%
22%
19%
Those who noted they would be a passenger in a car or other vehicle if public
transport was unavailable were asked whether that trip would be made especially
for them or if the driver was making the trip anyway. Most (70%) suggested the
trip would be made especially for them. This result coupled with the number who
noted they would drive a car themselves suggests that the availability of public
transport in Christchurch reduces the number of cars on the roads.
Number of
Percentage of
9.5 Whether Trip Already Being Made
or Driver Making Specific Trip
Respondents
Respondents
Trip would be made especially for me
345
70%
Driver would have made trip anyway
117
24%
Driver would be making a trip anyway but would go out of
28
6%
their way to accommodate my trip
Total
490

27 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

10
Travelling to the Bus/ Ferry Stop
Respondents were asked to indicate their means of travel to the stop where they
caught the bus or ferry. Most respondents (82%) walked to the bus (or ferry)
stop. This was the most common method of travelling to the stop at all times of
day and for all ages of passengers interviewed.
Number of
Percentage of
10.1 Method of Travel to Stop
Respondents
Respondents
Walked
1698
82%
Transferred from another bus
199
10%
Was driven by someone else
87
4%
Biked
45
2%
Drove myself
23
1%
Other
24
1%
10.2 Method of Travel to Stop by Time of Day

Peak AM
Daytime
Peak PM
Evening
Saturday
Sunday
Walked
80%
82%
85%
77%
83%
82%
Transferred from another bus
11%
11%
7%
12%
9%
7%
Was driven by someone else
5%
3%
3%
6%
5%
5%
Biked
2%
1%
3%
3%
1%
2%
Drove myself
1%
1%
1%
1%
0%
1%
Other
1%
2%
1%
1%
1%
2%
10.3 Method of Travel to Stop by Age

16 to 17
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 64
65+
Walked
83%
82%
84%
76%
81%
82%
Transferred from another bus
10%
9%
7%
14%
10%
11%
Was driven by someone else
5%
4%
4%
6%
3%
4%
Biked
1%
3%
4%
2%
2%
0%
Drove myself
0%
1%
0%
1%
3%
2%
Other
1%
1%
1%
0%
1%
1%
28 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz

11
Passengers with Bikes
In 2015 a series of questions were asked regarding taking a bike on a bus. Of the
2,077 Christchurch passengers interviewed, 10% had taken their bike on the bus
in the last three months.
Of those who had taken their bike on a bus, 29% (N=60) had experienced an
occasion where the bike rack was full meaning they were unable to put their bike
on the bus. The routes this was experienced on have been listed in Table 11.3.
Number of
Percentage of
11.1 Passengers Who Have Taken
Their Bike on a Bus
Respondents
Respondents
Have taken bike on bus
206
10%
Have not taken bike on bus
1871
90%
Number of
Percentage of
11.2 Incidence of Issues with
Full Bike Racks
Respondents
Respondents
Full rack has meant couldn't take bike on bus
60
29%
No issues with racks being full
146
71%
Number of
11.3 Routes Issues Have Been
Experienced On
Respondents
Go Bus
Yellow
13
Orbitor
13
Blue
10
60
4
80
3
Orange
2
130
2
140
2
Orbitor - Anti-clockwise
1
820
1
Red Bus
Purple
9
28
3
100
1
135
1
29 ENVIRONMENT CANTERBURY | 2015 METRO USER CHRISTCHURC
www.researchfirst.co.nz